CHICAGO | Politics and Current Events

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Yeah the best solution is to close another 50 schools.

Actually just close them all. Who cares about public schools in the city? Everybody knows that you either go private or to the burbs. Public schools in Chicago are just a safety net thing as well as adult payroll dispensaries for remaining CTU members.

If you really wanna raise your kids in the city on the cheap, home school them. Oh wait, I'm sure the CTU somehow got that outlawed through their tool in Madiganistan

This is all..., well,......fairly deplorable.

[Mr Roboto]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Yeah the best solution is to close another 50 schools.

Actually just close them all. Who cares about public schools in the city? Everybody knows that you either go private or to the burbs. Public schools in Chicago are just a safety net thing as well as adult payroll dispensaries for remaining CTU members.

If you really wanna raise your kids in the city on the cheap, home school them. Oh wait, I'm sure the CTU somehow got that outlawed through their tool in Madiganistan

Really? Are you this much of a 'jerk' (I must restrain myself), or do you just act like one for fun? My kids go to CPS.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Yeah the best solution is to close another 50 schools.

I'm only quoting this part because the rest was silly. CPS probably needs to close 100 schools. CPS has lost 10,000 students in the last two years and over 25,000 since 2010.

[the urban politician]

^ Then tell your kids' teachers to stop threatening to strike every other year to get salary increases and benefits that nobody else gets, all on the backs of your kids' futures, and all while this city is flat broke and just raised everybody's taxes and fees and will probably have to do so again.

Yet when they go out marching it's all "boohoo hoo, those poor widdle teachers, being abused by the big and bad Rahm machine". You are their customers and it would help if more CPS parents smartened up and didn't always show blind support to the CTU's little shakedown of the taxpayers.

They are the jerks.

[Mr Roboto]

That's actually a valid argument, so why don't you just say that instead of saying irrational and offensive crap about the schools? Like wow yeah CPS is such garbage, everyone who's cool like me knows you send your kids to private schools or the burbs. GTFOH with that.

And for the record plenty of parents are not happy with the teachers union and their antics, but we also don't need to be lectured by the likes of you on what we should do. Especially when it's obvious how little you the Suburban politician actually give a crap about the kids who often have no choice but to go to those schools.

[ardecila]

The demands of public-sector unions only seem crazy and irrational because so many of us in the private sector have gotten accustomed to almost zero income growth, with the bulk of returns flowing to capital (investors/shareholders) instead of to labor.

The reasons for that are complicated - there's no magic bullet - but I don't think the teachers are asking for unreasonable things. I just don't know if our city is even capable of giving the teachers a reasonable deal while still having enough for everything else. Ultimately the city is struggling with the problems of wealth concentration just like the middle class is. You can raise taxes on the wealthy in theory, but then how do you stop them from fleeing to Atlanta, DC or SF where they can get a better deal? Without the 1% we do have, Chicago would just be a big Cleveland.

[Via Chicago]

thank you, to all the posts above. the american middle/lower class loves to fight against itself rather than the bigger forces that are actually at play. the guy making 50k ranting and raving about the person making 62k, rather than the C suite person making 5 million. this is the way the elite like it. so yea, lets blame the teachers who have had the foresight to fight for their own self interest, rather than taking the appropriate steps to advance your own. unions could come back tomorrow if the american working class wanted them to (and the reality is the vast majority of office workers are indeed working class wage slaves). but its more fun to demonize your own neighbors as "greedy" for having the audacity to ask for COL increases (which despite what TUP claims, private sector workers do generally get at a minimum) and better working conditions. leave it to the average american to actively fight against their own self interests.

for those complaining, what is your definition of a "fair" salary and benefits for a teacher? why should they not be allowed to live a middle class life in a city that they are helping educate, and are living in? no one is getting wealthy off of being a middle school teacher. and this is coming from a private sector worker. i value the work our teachers do, its FAR more important to the world than what i do all day (marketing). they deserve everything they get and then some. if i could join a union in my industry i would in a heartbeat.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

the guy making 50k ranting and raving about the person making 62k, rather than the C suite person making 5 million.

Most of the people who don't like unions are making $75, 100, 150k a year and think it is absurd to hand out benefits and wages like they are candy. They are also probably equally disallsioned with executive pay.

this is the way the elite like it. so yea, lets blame the teachers who have had the foresight to fight for their own self interest, rather than taking the appropriate steps to advance your own.

At least you are honest about it, the union themselves loves to claim "we are striking for the children". No you are not, you are striking because you want a raise.

unions could come back tomorrow if the american working class wanted them to (and the reality is the vast majority of office workers are indeed working class wage slaves).

No they couldn't. In case you haven't noticed virtually all unionized industries have simply left the country. Again, totally out of touch with reality, how are unions going to come back when the entire infrastructure and industry that supported them collapsed (partially under the burden imposed by unions, see non-union Toyota Plants in the South which, suprise suprise, pay pretty damn well anyhow with out unionization). The fact is unions in the industrialized Midwest grew too powerful and too greedy. As such the entire ecosystem that supported them simply went to greener pastures at the first availible oppurtunity.

but its more fun to demonize your own neighbors as "greedy" for having the audacity to ask for COL increases (which despite what TUP claims, private sector workers do generally get at a minimum) and better working conditions. leave it to the average american to actively fight against their own self interests.

Or the "average American" is perfectly content having moved from the middle class to the upper middle class and sees dinosaur policies like pensions for what they are: relics of a bygone era. Maybe the average office worker isn't willing to join a union and submit to monthly dues and a set wage increased only by seniority simply so they can have a 40 hour work week instead of being asked to answer emails after business hours (oh the horror!). Maybe the average person wants to have a shot at performance based pay instead of being relegated to a system where you are paid simply by how long you've been there? Maybe the economy has gone through like three complete reinventions since unions were relevant and the role unions played in protecting workers from falling into a vat of moten steel just don't exist when you get to sit in an aircondiioned office and read emails all day instead of dragging around a giant wrench to adjust the widgets in a dirty hot dangerous environment? Of course not, it's still 1950 and unions are still relevant.

for those complaining, what is your definition of a "fair" salary and benefits for a teacher? why should they not be allowed to live a middle class life in a city that they are helping educate, and are living in? no one is getting wealthy off of being a middle school teacher. and this is coming from a private sector worker. i value the work our teachers do, its FAR more important to the world than what i do all day (marketing). they deserve everything they get and then some. if i could join a union in my industry i would in a heartbeat.

A fair salary would be pay based upon how well they teach, not how long they are there. A fair salary would mean actually contributing to their health care and retirement plans like literally everyone else in the modern economy. A fair salary would mean not having a dinosaur pension system which no one else gets and is a totally outdated (and disasterous) way of providing for people's retirements. And yes, the people at the top of the CPS pay scale making $120k+ a year with a matching pension are damn close to wealthy. No one in this world gets to keep making their salary after they retire, only people with rediculous benefits like that.

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

wage increased only by seniority simply so they can have a 40 hour work week instead of being asked to answer emails after business hours (oh the horror!). Maybe the average person wants to have a shot at performance based pay instead of being relegated to a system where you are paid simply by how long you've been there? Maybe the economy has gone through like three complete reinventions since unions were relevant and the role unions played in protecting workers from falling into a vat of moten steel just don't exist when you get to sit in an aircondiioned office and read emails all day instead of dragging around a giant wrench to adjust the widgets in a dirty hot dangerous environment? Of course not, it's still 1950 and unions are still relevant.

why should anyones labor be free? why SHOULD anyone be expected to answer emails outside of the time theyre actually being paid for? if you want people to be on call 24/7, then pay them a 24 hour wage.

that aside, every teacher i know already works extensively outside of traditional "office hours" more than just about anyone else

A fair salary would be pay based upon how well they teach, not how long they are there. A fair salary would mean actually contributing to their health care and retirement plans like literally everyone else in the modern economy. A fair salary would mean not having a dinosaur pension system which no one else gets and is a totally outdated (and disasterous) way of providing for people's retirements. And yes, the people at the top of the CPS pay scale making $120k+ a year with a matching pension are damn close to wealthy. No one in this world gets to keep making their salary after they retire, only people with rediculous benefits like that.

i am not angry at them for fighting for their own self interests. why would i be? i say good for them. i wish i had an organized group i could join that would fight for my rights and benefits too. one that would give me a stronger voice than the one i have on my own.

beyond that, how do you judge "how well they teach". how do you judge a teacher that works with disengaged, disadvantaged youth, in an underpriviliged neighborhood, and those who work in good school districts that cater to overwhelmingly affluent students? a standardized test? yea, we've seen how well that works. somehow lower income students are expected to do nothing but train to take a test all year because everything is metric driven. meanwhile wealthy parents will do everything they can to send their children to private schools that offer educations that are heavily focused on the arts, language, and experiential learning, you know, the first thing that gets cut from cash strapped schools.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Most of the people who don't like unions are making $75, 100, 150k a year and think it is absurd to hand out benefits and wages like they are candy. They are also probably equally disallsioned with executive pay.



At least you are honest about it, the union themselves loves to claim "we are striking for the children". No you are not, you are striking because you want a raise.



No they couldn't. In case you haven't noticed virtually all unionized industries have simply left the country. Again, totally out of touch with reality, how are unions going to come back when the entire infrastructure and industry that supported them collapsed (partially under the burden imposed by unions, see non-union Toyota Plants in the South which, suprise suprise, pay pretty damn well anyhow with out unionization). The fact is unions in the industrialized Midwest grew too powerful and too greedy. As such the entire ecosystem that supported them simply went to greener pastures at the first availible oppurtunity.




Or the "average American" is perfectly content having moved from the middle class to the upper middle class and sees dinosaur policies like pensions for what they are: relics of a bygone era. Maybe the average office worker isn't willing to join a union and submit to monthly dues and a set wage increased only by seniority simply so they can have a 40 hour work week instead of being asked to answer emails after business hours (oh the horror!). Maybe the average person wants to have a shot at performance based pay instead of being relegated to a system where you are paid simply by how long you've been there? Maybe the economy has gone through like three complete reinventions since unions were relevant and the role unions played in protecting workers from falling into a vat of moten steel just don't exist when you get to sit in an aircondiioned office and read emails all day instead of dragging around a giant wrench to adjust the widgets in a dirty hot dangerous environment? Of course not, it's still 1950 and unions are still relevant.



A fair salary would be pay based upon how well they teach, not how long they are there. A fair salary would mean actually contributing to their health care and retirement plans like literally everyone else in the modern economy. A fair salary would mean not having a dinosaur pension system which no one else gets and is a totally outdated (and disasterous) way of providing for people's retirements. And yes, the people at the top of the CPS pay scale making $120k+ a year with a matching pension are damn close to wealthy. No one in this world gets to keep making their salary after they retire, only people with rediculous benefits like that.

And having the ability to fire terrible workers is a big issue. CPS has a lot of teachers that are terrible and should not be near children. It of course has wonderful teachers as well, but the union protects both. It's really a bad thing for education.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by ardecila

The demands of public-sector unions only seem crazy and irrational because so many of us in the private sector have gotten accustomed to almost zero income growth, with the bulk of returns flowing to capital (investors/shareholders) instead of to labor.

The reasons for that are complicated - there's no magic bullet - but I don't think the teachers are asking for unreasonable things. I just don't know if our city is even capable of giving the teachers a reasonable deal while still having enough for everything else. Ultimately the city is struggling with the problems of wealth concentration just like the middle class is. You can raise taxes on the wealthy in theory, but then how do you stop them from fleeing to Atlanta, DC or SF where they can get a better deal? Without the 1% we do have, Chicago would just be a big Cleveland.

Pensions are irrational as they generally don't work well. Especially the Illinois variety that can't be changed. I completely agree on over taxing the wealthy in Chicago. Property taxes are very progressive in Chicago. Live in a nice area, pay a boatload of RE taxes on that expensive home.

My property tax bill is about $13K, a similar house in Englewood would likely pay $2K.

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Pensions are irrational as they generally don't work well. Especially the Illinois variety that can't be changed. I completely agree on over taxing the wealthy in Chicago. Property taxes are very progressive in Chicago. Live in a nice area, pay a boatload of RE taxes on that expensive home.

My property tax bill is about $13K, a similar house in Englewood would likely pay $2K.

pensions work just fine when both parties properly fund it. teachers have funded their pensions to the amount they agreed to. the other side didnt. but its all the teachers fault...

there are pensions in Illinois, such as IMRF, which are well funded and not in any sort of danger. because all parties did what they were supposed to, and its contributions werent raided for other pet projects (although that hasnt stopped the state from trying).

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

pensions work just fine when both parties properly fund it. teachers have funded their pensions to the amount they agreed to. the other side didnt. but its all the teachers fault.

there are pensions in Illinois, such as IMRF, which are well funded and not in any sort of danger. because all parties did what they were supposed to, and its contributions werent raided for other pet projects.

No they don't. Illinois pensions are a disaster in part because investment returns are awful, automatic 3% COLAs and locked in retirement dates. The state Constitution is a complete joke, locking in benefits that defy mathematics and economics.

[Mr Roboto]

^I agree, blaming the teachers for everything is short sighted and very simplistic. They are not greedy, they are essentially middle class public sector employees who are trying to live comfortably like everyone else, and some of them do a damn good job. Sure there are some leeches, but in my limited interaction with only a couple of schools and their teachers, I dont seem to see too many of those.

Indeed, there is a much larger issue of wealth concentration, which is prevalent in all urban areas of this nation and affects all of us, but also a history of just incredibly poor financial management by this city in particular. Not to mention the corruption. Really, no one is entirely innocent in all of this. To pick sides and say the CTU needs to STFU and deal, while it makes sense on paper, unfortunately in reality you are impacting people's livelihood and their ability to provide for their families.

[Via Chicago]

so why are you saying its Illinois pensions? other states do not have the problem we have and they have plenty of pensioned employees.

its constitutionally locked in for a reason. employees have forgeone higher salaries with the expectation of deferred pay, which is exactly what a pension is.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

so why are you saying its Illinois pensions? other states do not have the problem we have and they have plenty of pensioned employees.

its constitutionally locked in for a reason. employees have forgeone higher salaries with the expectation of deferred pay, which is exactly what a pension is.

Most other states do not have those "protections" in their constitutions. Just tweak retirement ages, change the contributions, eliminate cola's, and you can fix things. Illinois politicians are in the pocket of outdated public employee unions though especially at the drafting of the 1972 constitution. We live in a state where public sector workers have rights that no one else does. It's really awful and the costs are just starting to hit home. We are just starting to see the results of the costs with a shrinking population, which of course makes the situation worse.

Edit:
As a comparison, SSI recipients received a 0% increase in 2016 and it was just announced that they will receive a 0.3% increase in 2017. Illinois pensioners get 3%. Every single year. Inflation has been non existent for the last 5 years or so. We the taxpayers get to fund that increase even though our incomes haven't increased that much each year.

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Edit:
As a comparison, SSI recipients received a 0% increase in 2016 and it was just announced that they will receive a 0.3% increase in 2017. Illinois pensioners get 3%. Every single year. Inflation has been non existent for the last 5 years or so. We the taxpayers get to fund that increase even though our incomes haven't increased that much each year.

who is "we"? every job ive ever had, a 2-3% merit/COL increase per year is pretty much standard as long as the company is performing well and youre not a total fuck up. im lucky if it covers the increase in my rent (which last i checked has never gone down despite what you say about inflation).

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

who is "we"? every job ive ever had, a 2-3% merit/COL increase per year is pretty much standard as long as the company is performing well and youre not a total fuck up. im lucky if it covers the increase in my rent (which last i checked has never gone down despite what you say about inflation).

Inflation numbers are not mine, the feds produce them. AMIs are basically flat over the last 10 years, so those 3% compounding COLAs for Illinois pensioners are freaking huge comparatively. Again, SSI recipients got a 0% increase in 2016 and will get a 0.3% increase in 2017. Pensions should be eliminated going forward for every new hire to state government and most local workers, including teachers.

[Via Chicago]

the irony is 401ks were designed as a vehicle to SUPPLEMENT pensions, and for high earners at that. they were never intended to be the sole vehicle of retirement savings for middle class americans. while pensions may have their flaws, 401ks have zero security. they are a product that Wall Street designed to transfer wealth from average americans to fund managers. fees are borderline criminal on most, and many companies hardly match at all. it leaves individuals with 100% of the burden of risk. how many americans even have an emergency fund, much less know what kind of investment to put their money into long term? at least pensions are professionally managed. on top of it, risk is spread out over a high number of participants and management fees are lower too. DB plans also stimulate the economy, as people have more money in their pocket after each paycheck that they can use on consumer spending.

on top of it we have congress trying to slash social security, which as it is will be just enough to keep someone without any other lifelines surviving in abject poverty. and guess what, then we as taxpayers will face higher public assistance costs. cool country we got going.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

the irony is 401ks were designed as a vehicle to SUPPLEMENT pensions, and for high earners at that. they were never intended to be the sole vehicle of retirement savings for middle class americans. while pensions may have their flaws, 401ks have zero security. they are a product that Wall Street designed to transfer wealth from average americans to fund managers. fees are borderline criminal on most, and many companies hardly match at all. it leaves individuals with 100% of the burden of risk. how many americans even have an emergency fund, much less know what kind of investment to put their money into long term? at least pensions are professionally managed. on top of it, risk is spread out over a high number of participants and management fees are lower too. DB plans also stimulate the economy, as people have more money in their pocket after each paycheck that they can use on consumer spending.

on top of it we have congress trying to slash social security, which as it is will be just enough to keep someone without any other lifelines surviving in abject poverty. and guess what, then we as taxpayers will face higher public assistance costs. cool country we got going.

The irony is that public pensions rely on wall street too, they just come with a taxpayer guarantee if market returns don't work out. DB plans don't work. That's why they have been eliminated for all but the public sector unions that bribe politicians.

Public employees should be on SSI like the vast majority of the workforce.